limit of selection???
From: A.C.H. (br.hessels_at_planet.nl)
Date: 08/19/04
- Next message: CurtAdams: "Re: Dawkins gives incorrect answer"
- Previous message: Michael Ragland: "Re: Dawkins gives incorrect answer"
- Next in thread: Anon.: "Re: limit of selection???"
- Reply: Anon.: "Re: limit of selection???"
- Reply: Tim Tyler: "Re: limit of selection???"
- Reply: Malcolm: "Re: limit of selection???"
- Maybe reply: John Edser: "Re: limit of selection???"
- Reply: dkomo: "Re: limit of selection???"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 23:35:54 +0000 (UTC)
I've seen various lists dealing with "limits of selection"; reasons
why natural selection would not result in perfect (or optimal)
adaptation. (Dawkins, Mark Ridley, Mayr).
The following reason is, i believe, not in those lists:
because an adaptation is caused by its selection pressure, it can not
escape its selection pressure.
Again:
The adaptation is linked to whatever selects it, it can not outperform
it.
Again:
an example: a prey will never be able to definitely outperform its
predator, because there is no selection beyond what's actually doing
the selecting (the predator).
This link between selection and adaptation is, i believe, a big part
of the reason why ecosystems don't fall apart, so it's important....
- Next message: CurtAdams: "Re: Dawkins gives incorrect answer"
- Previous message: Michael Ragland: "Re: Dawkins gives incorrect answer"
- Next in thread: Anon.: "Re: limit of selection???"
- Reply: Anon.: "Re: limit of selection???"
- Reply: Tim Tyler: "Re: limit of selection???"
- Reply: Malcolm: "Re: limit of selection???"
- Maybe reply: John Edser: "Re: limit of selection???"
- Reply: dkomo: "Re: limit of selection???"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|